▲ | eru 10 hours ago | |
> Some theorists point out the obvious hack: take away the hot potato. Slow the game down. Make shares harder to flip, make earnings less frequent. If you could only trade stock once a year, you'd actually care what the company looks like in a year. If they only reported results annually, you'd be forced to think in years, not quarters. Google's original founders still hold the majority of voting rights. Making trading less efficient wouldn't change anything here. > It's a tradeoff: you can have maximum liquidity and hyper-efficient capital markets, but then you get short-term brain damage. Or you can slow the game down, but then you're basically asking people to trust managers more and accept worse capital efficiency. No, your proposal wouldn't work at all. A big problem is actually that most managers in most companies mostly work for themselves. It's called a 'principal/agent problem'. Exactly as you say 'execs get more room to bullshit.' Btw, there's private equity funds with very long capital lock-ups. Their effects on companies typically aren't loved by the people who voice similar concerns to yours. |